Fairline Targa 63GTO

PowerYachtBlog said:
But here the 63 Targa GTO has 30-40% extra, something the Aussie down under builders (Rivera and Maritimo) like to do on this size (60ft or over).
In down under they do it cause the customer who upgrades in this size is usually setting sights on round a Australia cruise and the West part of Aus has couple spots where you need the range.
Click to expand...
Yes but its not about long distance cruising range, its about the ability to buy a large quantity of fuel at a cheaper price in locations where its available. Even in the Med fuel costs vary hugely from one location to another and the ability to buy a lot of fuel in a cheap location is a big bonus IMHO
 
Deleted User said:
Yes but its not about long distance cruising range, its about the ability to buy a large quantity of fuel at a cheaper price in locations where its available. Even in the Med fuel costs vary hugely from one location to another and the ability to buy a lot of fuel in a cheap location is a big bonus IMHO
Click to expand...
100% agreed - together with the ability to refuel less often, since it's a boring process indeed.
Btw, I didn't remember that the F630 holds 3700 litres.
I reckon that PYB is right in saying that Ferretti USED to have larger tanks - see this pic from my thread about tank testing (the older 57 being MUCH smaller than the 630):
cNoLQ2nj.jpg
 
MapisM said:
100% agreed - together with the ability to refuel less often, since it's a boring process indeed.
Btw, I didn't remember that the F630 holds 3700 litres.
I reckon that PYB is right in saying that Ferretti USED to have larger tanks - see this pic from my thread about tank testing (the older 57 being MUCH smaller than the 630):
Click to expand...

Actually I dont think that this is Ferretti trying to help the boat owner. The fact is that length for length, Ferrettis are generally beamier and heavier than other boats and have to be fitted with larger engines to make them go properly so a larger fuel tank is just a recognition of this. Not complaining btw, its just a characteristic of the brand
 
Yup, understood, but what I meant is that they seem to have actually reduced tankage over the years, by comparison:
On a 57' footer powered by V8/800hp engines, 3400 litres is definitely OTT.
On a 65' footer (which is what your boat actually is, IIRC) powered by V12/1200 (i.e. 50% more power), 3700 litres is still good but not equally good.

Apropos, your comparison F630/T63 comparison is interesting also when applied to my DP and the F57:
Exactly the same propulsion - 800hp MAN, ZF gearbox and BPM V-drive.
Bar a few centimeters, they have exactly the same length and width.
The DP is a tad heavier at full load, in spite of the smaller tankage (2700), but it's just a matter of a few hundreds Kg.
Even the deadrise is very similar - 15° F57 vs. 16° DP56.
In spite of all that, the F57 (whose hull has a great reputation, btw) is 2 kts slower.
Sometimes I think that there's still a lot of black art (and sheer luck) in boat design...!
 
MapisM said:
Sometimes I think that there's still a lot of black art (and sheer luck) in boat design...!
Click to expand...
Yes but the black art and luck hasnt happened with the 63GTO yet. I'm guessing that the quoted top speed is what the designers have calculated. Maybe they're being super conservative to save themselves potential litigation in the future or maybe there's a genuine design reason why the boat is going to be relatively slow. Or maybe its just a copywriting cock up (I always tend to favour cock up over any other reason). However there will be plenty of buyers looking at the spec and thinking 32kts isnt fast enough when I load my 400kg Williams on board plus my wife's clothes/shoes and I've got mid season Med sterngear fouling. I bet Fairline change this figure very soon
 
MapisM said:
Bar a few centimeters, they have exactly the same length and width.

In spite of all that, the F57 (whose hull has a great reputation, btw) is 2 kts slower.
Sometimes I think that there's still a lot of black art (and sheer luck) in boat design...!
Click to expand...

No it's calculated ,in post # 60 above I mentioned shaft angle and dangly bits .
Shaft angle if different will impact ,wasted Hp not pushing fwds
Dangly bits = drag more so cica 30 + knots ,
Also the position of the rudders in relation to knackering the water flow - excess drag .

You can,t use ATBE , as they never really are .

As low as poss for shaft angle ,not sure what % of fwd thrust is lost / degree , that's the speed difference .
With the 63 GTO , the more they push that bulkhead back ( mid cabin ) the greater the shaft angle lost thrust
Amarti was a stickler if not obsessive , for the above ,it's just you don,t see it at a boat show .

The dead rise thing is more ride not speed ,

Drag is the speed killer For what's left of the 1200 Hp
 
Portofino said:
You can,t use ATBE , as they never really are .
Click to expand...
I appreciate that, of course.
But in the F57/DP56 comparison it's actually impressive how large the similarities are - much more than between the F630 and the T63GTO. Anyhow, I neither wanted to dismiss the F57 (far from it, one of them has been in fact included in our very short final list) nor celebrate the DP.

I'm just saying that when talking of a 2 knots difference out of 30+, I'm very skeptic than even the best naval architects on earth can nail it based on computer calculations alone, and it's only after the boat is tried and tested that some conclusions can be drawn.
So far, all we know for sure (and I witnessed that) is that a large and comfortable flybridge as the F630 is, with V-drive propulsions, can reach 34 knots with 1224hp each side.
For the T63, I wouldn't place any bet on her being able to do a bit better, as she should on paper, but who knows...?
 
Last edited:
Right so the last few pages have glossed over me a bit in terms of shaft diameter, coefficient of drag and so on. Throwing a curve ball out there have sports boats like this had their day when Princess do the S range?

The S60 claims 38 knots from Mann 1200 V8 engines, you get a garage, aft sun bed and a flybridge whilst still keeping sleek lines. To save you the bother of looking it up, 3,200 litres :)

Off to Cannes now, will try to immerse myself in European boats & unlearn years of British manufacturers.......

Mange tout Rodney. :)

Henry :)

I know I'm a flybridge owner so don't understand sports boats but to the uneducated something like that looks the best of both worlds.
 
Hope you have a nice trip @ Cannes , I think you will increase your understanding of sports boats , with more than 1/2 hour of sun on your back :)
Re S 60 --- well that's the point 38 knots is acceptable , that's not gonna generate 90 posts discussing on here :)

Princess are big in the SOF the French love them and they imho look better than the current crop of Sunseeker ,in fact I would say they have edged forward style wise .All that black slash glazing on SS hulls is imho all ready dated .
 
We were at the Cannes show yesterday as guests of Sunseeker, but also had invitations to visit Fairline, Princess and some of the Ferretti Group brands. We spent a fair amount of time on the Targa 63GTO with a senior sales person from the local distributor. Just for the record, I did not speak to anyone from Fairline in the UK.

FWIW initial comments and views are below ...

Firstly, they were keen to stress the boat was not finished when delivered to Cannes and Fairline UK were still working on the interiors right up to the start of the show. This was fairly obvious from the standard of the decoration and finishes and has to be taken into account when considering the comments below.

Although I'm no expert, I have owned several similar sized sports cruisers in the Med and so have some practical experience of using this type of boat in the real world. I think the overall concept and design is good. There are several different upper saloon/galley layouts available, the boat can be specified with three or four cabins down below, regardless of which option is chosen there is a good sized cockpit, the garage is a reasonable size (and will take a Williams 325) and there is a crew cabin option if needed. As always there are compromises to be made with each option. The sales person I was with thought the aft galley/dinette, 3-cabin and day heads, larger garage and no crew cabin version would be the best option for the Med, but this moves the sliding door back, reduces outdoor/cockpit space slightly and you lose the rear sunpad.

Although there were some minor niggles (e.g. bathroom doors that didn't fully open), I didn't see any major problems with the interior layout (like the ceiling height in the master on the 53). The master cabin is pushed well back and right into the bottom of the hull but the bathroom and wardrobe separate the cabin from the engine room and should minimise intrusive generator noise, etc. The floor slopes slightly up at the sides, but the ceiling is flat and the interior headroom and overall impression of space was very good. The VIP/guest cabins were a good size and fairly standard in terms of layout, headroom, space between and around beds, etc. All of the bathrooms seemed a little small compared with the latest offerings from Sunseeker and Princess and the standard of the fittings and finishes needs to be upgraded, but otherwise no major problems. The show boat had the separate day heads option and while this is conveniently located at the bottom of the stairs and adds a touch of luxury, it does seem to be a relatively inefficient use of space.

Notwithstanding the fact that this is boat number 1 and is a work in progress, I was still left feeling that quite a lot of work is required to match the overall standard of interior fit, finish and the sheer ingenuity in using space that Sunseeker, Princess and others are currently achieving. There were some very nice technical details like the full width windscreen (with no mullions), multi-purpose bow and cockpit seating areas, etc. and as expected from Fairline, the quality of craftsmanship on woodwork, etc. in the interiors was very high, but overall I was still left feeling they are behind in terms of how all the details are brought together. You can debate the relative importance of interior finishes vs seakeeping and mechanicals, "traditional craftsmanship" vs the modern Ikea flat pack look, etc. but my feeling is that this is an area where Sunseeker/Princess/Ferretti have all moved on in recent years and Fairline have some catching up to do.

The sales person was keen to stress that the Vripack designed hull uses a different concept to previous Fairline sportcruisers. I can recall him mentioning that the bottom was flatter at the stern than a traditional deep-vee and that the bow spreads the water rather than cutting through it, although I have to admit the technical details were lost on me. He did mention that one of the consequences of the new design is much lower noise levels when underway ... they claim class leading noise levels in the cockpit and interiors when underway and greatly improved "comfort" at cruising speeds.

In terms of performance ... I was told they had achieved just over 31 knots on a sea trial of the show boat earlier in the week and are considering changing props to improve that slightly. However, the limiting factor on the show boat is the engines. The view of the sales person I was with was that a maximum of 31-32 knots was marginal for a sports cruiser in the Med and that to be genuinely competitive in this market they need to offer a maximum of 34-36 knots, with a fully laden, mid-season, partially fouled cruise of 26-28 knots easily achievable. He expected the MAN V8 option would beat the quoted 31-32 knot maximum but said they were all hoping for a MAN V12 option ... they think there is space in the engine room.

In summary, I was generally impressed by what I saw and applaud Fairline's achievements under what I am sure have been very challenging circumstances over the last 12-18 months. Would I buy a Targa 63GTO rather than an equivalent new model from Princess or Sunseeker? That's a much more difficult question to answer. Princess have the all new V60 and V65 coming soon which based on recent product launches could be impressive and I understand Sunseeker are looking at filling the gap in the Predator range between the 57 and 68.
 
Portofino said:
Re S 60 --- well that's the point 38 knots is acceptable
Click to expand...
Mmm... Define acceptable. Useless is more like it, imho.
How many times do you think that a boat like the S60, in real world, will be used to go from SoF to Corsica at a 30+ kts AVERAGE?
It's half an hour difference vs. the poor guy who does the same route with his "non-S" flybridge at 25 knots, ferchrissake!
Not to mention that the latter will probably enjoy a more comfortable trip, and pay the restaurant for himself and all his guests out of fuel savings alone.

And ref. the 90 posts, c'mon, that's nothing.
You are talking as if here in the asylum you would have never seen endless debates on exploding bogs and other even more trivial subjects... :rolleyes: :D
 
DAW said:
The sales person was keen to stress that the Vripack designed hull uses a different concept to previous Fairline sportcruisers. I can recall him mentioning that the bottom was flatter at the stern than a traditional deep-vee and that the bow spreads the water rather than cutting through it
Click to expand...
Now, that is interesting.

The "flatter at the stern" point reminds me of pad keels, which were pioneered by Fountain (together with the notched transom, but that's only related to outdrive propulsion).
The concept proved to be pretty effective, but we are talking of a yard whose SLOWER boats were capable of 60kts, and the faster ones were well into 3 digits speed.
All of them with outdrives, and much smaller than the T63... Hard to think that any concept which works well on these "almost racing" hulls can be transferred to much slower/heavier/larger vessels... :confused:

I'm a bit puzzled also by the bow spreading rather than cutting through the water.
There's no such thing as a planing hull that cuts through the water - all of them slam above it and spread water aside, bar none.
Some more than others, obviously, but at the end of the day it's just a matter of how deep the V is at the bow.
A flat deadrise astern and a "water spreading" bow (i.e. a flattish V also at the bow) don't suggest a comfortable ride, in principle... :nonchalance:
 
petem said:
Where's Jack by the way, we need to know more about that hull design!
Click to expand...
Video up now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-Hxn4-leEM. Not much about performance or hull design but the running shots look good. She seems to run flatter than previous Fairlines and the bow seems to be more immersed. I'm guessing this should make her a comfortable sea boat but at the same time this may explain the slight lack of speed
 
going off topic slightly, but mapis taking about pads has reminded me of something. does anyone have any pictures of a hull with a 'pad'?

My windy has a very odd (to me anyway) flat section which goes from the transom to about 18 inches forward of the transom, it probably 8 inches wide.

Is this a pad?
 
Deleted User said:
the running shots look good
Click to expand...
Agreed, she definitely looks beautiful in the water, well proportioned and sleek even if (relatively) high for the type of boat.
My compatriot obviously did a good job at his drawing table! :encouragement:

Ref.cruising attitude, I agree that the AoA looks just about right, compared to some other FLs - I remember for instance another MBY video of the Sq55 which made you wonder if they fitted an escalator along the walkarounds, to reach the bow while under way...!
Otoh, it's the overall lifting that strikes me as a bit poor.
I mean, I'm not sure if the boat was keeping the 25kts which were mentioned through all the running shots, but aside from a few seconds starting from 8:40 where she is filmed at a borderline SD speed, in the other bits the boats was firmly in P speed territory.
And considering that, she seemed to be sitting a bit too deep in the water, imho - which is what I mean by poor overall lifting, and might explain the unimpressive speed/power ratio.

Then again, of course I'm only making an armchair evaluation... :rolleyes:
 
julians said:
going off topic slightly, but mapis taking about pads has reminded me of something. does anyone have any pictures of a hull with a 'pad'?
Click to expand...
No idea about Windy hulls, but fwiw, this is how a pad keel looks like on a Fountain.
As you can see, the central part of the hull has a deadrise which is slightly lower than the rest, resulting also in narrow longitudinal steps along its sides (which supposedly contribute to improve side stability).
The main idea is that at very high speed, when the wet surface is just a small triangle at the stern, the proportion of the hull with a flatter deadrise becomes higher, hence giving more lift, reducing drag, and increasing speed.
But at slower speeds, that smallish flatter section is practically irrelevant.

PS: forget the weird transom shape, that's the notched transom I mentioned before, which is only meant to allow a higher installation of the outdrive - a completely different kettle of fish.
EOxJWs58_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top